Legal Opinion
Oppenheimer v. Harriman National Bank & Trust Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided April 26, 1937No. Nos. 588, 670PublishedCited by 46 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Butler
For some years prior to the occurrences out of which this litigation arose the defendant bank was doing business in New York City. Being unable to meet current demands, it closed March 3, 1933. March 13 a conservator was appointed; October 16 the comptroller declared it insolvent and appointed a receiver. Later, he assessed the stockholders par value of their stock. May 31, Oppenheimer brought this action in the federal court for the southern district of New York to recover damages upon an executed rescission of a sale to him of stock of the bank by means of fraudulent representations made by…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- National Bank v. MatthewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Beuttell v. MagoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Scott v. DeweeseSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
- Empire State Cattle Co. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- American Nat. Bank of Nashville v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by46 opinions
- Anderson v. AbbottSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Allen v. Geneva Steel CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- Wade A. Kilpatrick, Stan E. Golub v. John C. Riddle, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., as Receiver for First Republicbank Houston, N.A.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1990
- Stirling Homex Corporation v. RaichleCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1978
- Hoehn v. CrewsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1944
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.